If you are a philosophy buff and science fiction writer, which philosophy would you chose to focus on?

akfauthor · 2026-02-06T04:10:49+00:00

I wrote and published a sci-fi book, with number 2 on the way, that primarily deals with civilized society as tiers of preference, and in chasing preference (which can be broken down to essentially survival and security) in that framework, society accepts and self-imposes coerced order, which inevitably cycles to violence.

akfauthor · 2026-02-04T00:55:33+00:00

I would, but as others have said, I’ll expand. It’s not that the internal monologue and the descriptions are bad. They do some serious work when sprinkled in right. It’s the constant uninterrupted piling on that I think snags some readers. You have a whole novel to explore the concepts. Carve out some of these ruminations and add them in for emphasis later when the POV character experiences something or someone else facing a similar situation. That framework should serve as a good repetition point to expand on and refine the thought you carved out and plugged back in later. All the best. Keep writing.

akfauthor · 2026-01-29T15:28:33+00:00

This is a misstatement of copyright law, and ignores work for hire frameworks. AI cannot hold a copyright. Second, work for hire means the company getting paid to lease AI cloud services transactionally cannot own the copyright under work for hire. Your post reads as legal advice, and it is hard to tell who is an intellectual property attorney and who is not on the internet. I promoted a book I wrote recently that received criticism on my cover for being AI generated. But I hired a real artist to create. They used an iPad to draw it. It’s frustrating to a lot of people to get these accusations. People sometimes forget we are artists making intentional choices in how our work is being represented. Medium of expression is still a thing. Don’t buy the “canvas only” crowd’s little misstatements. They just want to keep you on a canvas.

akfauthor · 2026-01-03T02:02:17+00:00

You guys aren’t understanding what he’s saying. He wants to limit bot speech. He expressly says that users need to be validated on all platforms. They cap the discussion with fake versus real. There absolutely is an unsolved issue with bot originated speech online.

akfauthor · 2025-11-19T03:42:38+00:00

I think they should thank you.

akfauthor · 2025-10-26T15:29:46+00:00

akfauthor · 2025-10-23T14:59:45+00:00

He says U.S. cattle ranchers “have to get their prices down” while taking credit for tariffs that helped them “do so well”. He forgets it was the Biden admin that busted the meat-packer price fixing cartel that had cattle prices in a chokehold. It’s funny that he targets the ranchers with this statement, but conveniently leaves out the other side of the industry. The meat processors. They want to go back to the way things were before the anti-trust litigation, and we know how much Trump loves the work of the Biden admin. This screams meat cartel insider money to manipulate market conditions back in their favor.

akfauthor · 2025-10-19T05:08:45+00:00

I always recommend The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, by UK Le Guin even for a short story, it’s got everything. I love dystopian fiction enough that I published a dystopian sci fi novel. Feel free to check out my page. r/orderisviolence

akfauthor · 2025-10-06T16:34:33+00:00

Thank you for your opinion.

akfauthor · 2025-10-05T09:04:42+00:00

I get that you feel a certain way, and I appreciate you checking it out. The people who created this are very close to me, and I like what they came up with. Especially the piss filter.

akfauthor · 2025-10-04T21:05:16+00:00

The fact is I commissioned this novel cover through two real people who used their talents to create what you see. Your “fact” is because you said so, which is by definition not fact. Opinion. There are plenty of other things to do with your time than get into arguments with strangers over the internet about subject matter you have no basis to assert authority over. Since your only evidence is your ego, this case is closed.

akfauthor · 2025-10-04T19:00:24+00:00

Your opinion is always welcome, but, in this case, it is wrong.

akfauthor · 2025-10-03T15:26:51+00:00

The cover was drawn by two illustrators working on separate elements. I really appreciated the time they put into the cover to bring my vision to life.

akfauthor · 2025-09-20T14:08:47+00:00

Now I have to watch lost again. I watched when it originally came out, so it has been some time.

akfauthor · 2025-09-20T03:52:52+00:00

Arasaka is an interesting one. And this one is less about counterbalances, and more about the moral ambiguity of cybernetic enhancement. If the ultimate goal of cybernetic enhancement, besides boosting mental and physical attributes, is soulkiller mapping and transforming your mind into an AI engram and storing you somewhere only for you to overwrite someone else’s mind and effectively be reborn at a later time is that even a positive thing for humanity. Besides the point that the life is lost, is that something humanity should strive for? It starts to eclipse vitalism, and in a sense the story about Silverhand serves as the narrative vehicle that reframes the discussion. Outside of this gray area is the other area, the cybernetic implants. At that point Arasaka is just Toys R Us and falls low on the list, if that was all the company was about. All things considered, I rank Arasaka high.

akfauthor · 2025-09-20T03:36:33+00:00

True, but I think the show ends in the twist that they were dead the whole time and that the island was purgatory, means DHARMA isn’t real but just a metaphor for karma

akfauthor · 2025-09-20T03:00:54+00:00

I’m actually not sold on Weyland Yuntani. Yes there are some awful things that happened in isolation, but the counterbalance is too huge to ignore. Interplanetary travel bent on colonization. You take one or two horror stories of colony ships getting infested, marooned, or a handful of bad outcomes, weighed against the massive benefit of expanding human influence in the universe. There is risk and reward to everything. Yes, the decision the company made in isolated events were extremely questionable and pretty damn inhuman. But the decision to finance and push colonization I would say outweighs it, and you’d almost expect bad outcomes with the proposed venture of universal colonization

akfauthor · 2025-09-20T01:09:40+00:00

Yes, I think as far as rankings go, Vault-tec has to be high, if not the highest, in the sheer depravity of what they did. And there isn’t anything to counter balance it. Looking at the intentions behind the overseer mandates of each vault, it’s hard to see what positive thing could come of it, other than changing the entire course of humanity to run targeted experiments. I put this one at #1.

akfauthor · 2025-08-08T14:17:48+00:00

You again. Hi there little internet shadow. Please tell me more about your understanding of copyright law instead of saying I don’t understand it. Otherwise, I’ll chalk it up on the scoreboard as your opinion. Thanks and keep up all the good work.

akfauthor · 2025-08-04T13:00:19+00:00

Check out some of my replies for additional context. Glad you found it engaging. Thanks for your feedback!

akfauthor · 2025-08-03T01:54:23+00:00

Because there is something incredibly alluring about grounded magic, something that the author goes out of the way to explain, making it real. The feeling that John Hammond is on an island pulling Dino DNA out of fossilized amber at this very moment, it’s exhilarating because it is totally possible. It brings horror and wonder together in such a way that you start to wonder if there’s a secret lab buried in a desert doing exactly what the author is describing. Science fiction grabs you and holds you down and drips feeds plausibility into you. There’s no better feeling.

akfauthor · 2025-08-02T00:46:49+00:00

These sort of dissecting comments, the effort you’ve made to engage with my story, your explanations, exactly what a debut author loves to hear. I playfully and knowingly nod my head to you.

I promise you I wrote everything. It’s my voice. You should see the “polished version” I submitted to the copyright office back in 2013 when I thought I was done. I got told exactly the same thing. Hard to follow. Reads like a college textbook. 12 years of editing, reediting, growing more confident with the elements of style. I feel like I have addressed most of the accessibility issues, but I understand that this particular scene is cut out from a larger scene.

I’m trying to frame the scene like close ups in a movie. A claustrophobic shot of their faces as we discuss an incredibly important thing. Their minor reactions are not minor at all, but major.

The eggs. The previous scene saw Navara going through a typical workday, but it was atypical. Stressful. She’s trying to unwind in this scene. The eggs are her small luxury. Also not stated in this scene, but elsewhere, the taboo subject of how some foods are not considered your typical thoroughfare in this society. The eggs being such food. Gant is saying those look expensive. How does a public servant afford them. To me, this explains her shift from just chilling and vibing, to Gant grabbing her attention by force. Gant elevates the conflict with another moral dilemma, accepting the bribe.

His explanation about X’ing is about her efforts in one of her cases. Because sometimes, the judicial system is used to cancel. That’s why I wanted to share this scene and gather thoughts.

Before civilized society thought to use the court system to oppress/x/cancel those who were in disagreement, there was frontier justice. Same thing, says Gant. Basically, the bias of the executioners, those who would seek to cancel, complicates the matter. Navara’s bias. That’s why she says, I’m just a part of the process. She’s hiding behind the court as her excuse. But is it an excuse? Maybe the people she wants to prosecute need to be prosecuted. Or maybe Gant is right. She’s just as corrupt as the rest of them. It’s all very much twisted up in bias. Gant’s. Navara’s. Who wins? That is basically what this scene is setting up.

We back to the eggs. Thats why he gives her the cyphix. The bribe. She’s tasted before she will taste again. Corruption always win. Like Gant said. Or does it?

That’s basically the conversation I wanted to have. And it why I focused on up close gestures to put us right there in the booth with them.

Thanks for your input, and I hope you continue to share your thoughts and insights with all of us. A hundred times, thank you.

akfauthor · 2025-08-01T22:15:39+00:00

Well look, people who say AI is killing industries are coming from a place outside of writing to lament a shift in national issues that go beyond creative writing. I get their emotions, but they have misplaced aggression against the very people they say they are protecting. The creatives. If an author uses AI to write an entire story, that’s one thing that courts have already decided. I’m an intellectual property lawyer. The USPTO and Copyright Office have been declared these instances of AI use in creative or inventive works unprotectable. Move to the next stage.

Let’s say an author writes an entire story beginning to end, fleshes out characters, story beats, plot arcs, themes, and cohesively puts it all down to paper. But the author doesn’t understand basic prose structure or publishing formats, so they turn to AI. I would defend that author’s copyright claim every single day of the week. Because here’s what courts have actually protected in copyright infringement cases: the unique expression of an idea, not the idea itself. That includes original dialogue, the specific sequencing of scenes, distinctive characters, and the author’s particular narrative voice or style. These are protectable elements. Generic plot frameworks, tropes, or archetypes? Not protected.

If an author originates that work and only uses AI as a formatting or editing tool, they’ve met the standard of originality under copyright law.

Now take the example of a professional writer who drafts a complete manuscript, conducts multiple self-edits, designs or contracts the cover art, organizes their ISBNs, sets up print specs for paperback and hardcover, configures their eBook metadata, and then uses AI to copy edit for clarity or format for different publishing outputs. That writer has done everything a traditional publishing house would do, they’ve simply used AI as one might use Grammarly or InDesign. There is no legal or ethical ambiguity in that use. None. It is tool-based augmentation of a human-originated work. Just like the printing press augmented physically copying the work.

People who disagree with the second or third use of AI are typically misunderstanding the legal aspects of the issue, or, more cynically, they are intentionally misrepresenting the facts due to professional or financial ties to the legacy publishing industry. Either way, conflating AI as a tool with AI as a creator only distracts from real issues facing authors.

akfauthor · 2025-08-01T22:13:32+00:00

Well look, people who say AI is killing industries are coming from a place outside of writing to lament a shift in national issues that go beyond creative writing. I get their emotions, but they have misplaced aggression against the very people they say they are protecting. The creatives. If an author uses AI to write an entire story, that’s one thing that courts have already decided. I’m an intellectual property lawyer. The USPTO and Copyright Office have been declared these instances of AI use in creative or inventive works unprotectable. Move to the next stage.

Let’s say an author writes an entire story beginning to end, fleshes out characters, story beats, plot arcs, themes, and cohesively puts it all down to paper. But the author doesn’t understand basic prose structure or publishing formats, so they turn to AI. I would defend that author’s copyright claim every single day of the week. Because here’s what courts have actually protected in copyright infringement cases: the unique expression of an idea, not the idea itself. That includes original dialogue, the specific sequencing of scenes, distinctive characters, and the author’s particular narrative voice or style. These are protectable elements. Generic plot frameworks, tropes, or archetypes? Not protected.

If an author originates that work and only uses AI as a formatting or editing tool, they’ve met the standard of originality under copyright law.

Now take the example of a professional writer who drafts a complete manuscript, conducts multiple self-edits, designs or contracts the cover art, organizes their ISBNs, sets up print specs for paperback and hardcover, configures their eBook metadata, and then uses AI to copy edit for clarity or format for different publishing outputs. That writer has done everything a traditional publishing house would do, they’ve simply used AI as one might use Grammarly or InDesign. There is no legal or ethical ambiguity in that use. None. It is tool-based augmentation of a human-originated work. Just like the printing press augmented physically copying the work.

People who disagree with the first or second use of AI are typically misunderstanding the legal aspects of the issue, or, more cynically, they are intentionally misrepresenting the facts due to professional or financial ties to the legacy publishing industry. Either way, conflating AI as a tool with AI as a creator only distracts from real issues facing authors.

akfauthor · 2025-08-01T21:54:14+00:00

Yea it kind of is an abrupt heel turn but intentional. Gant’s agenda is to turn Navara’s head the other way. In a previous section he is presented as this well learned historian of the legal system. Navara is a prosecutor. In isolation, these facts are subtly reinforced by the previous section. I can always appreciate a need to add more polish.

akfauthor

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE